Copyright history and the future: What's culture got to do with it?

Journal of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A.

Volumn 47, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 209-264

  Geller, Paul Edward ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041413181     PISSN: 08863520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (375)

1. Edward Sapir, Culture, Genuine and Spurious, in SELECTED WRITINGS IN LANGUAGE, CULTURE, AND PERSONALITY 308, 317 (David G. Mandelbaum ed., 1985).
2. For critical analysis, see infra text accompanying notes 252-77.
3. For this position, see CLAUDE LÉVI-STRAUSS, RACE AND HISTORY (1952).
4. For further analysis, see HAROLD A. INNIS, EMPIRE AND COMMUNICATIONS (David Godfry ed., Press Porcépic 1986) (1950); JACK GOODY, THE LOGIC OF WRITING AND THE ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY (1986).
5. For further analysis, see HAROLD A. INNIS, EMPIRE AND COMMUNICATIONS (David Godfry ed., Press Porcépic 1986) (1950); JACK GOODY, THE LOGIC OF WRITING AND THE ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY (1986).
6. See, e.g., ERIC A. HAVELOCK, PREFACE TO PLATO 93-94 (1963) (distinguishing oral improvisation in pre-Classic Greece and in later peasant societies).
7. See, e.g., ALFRED GELL, ART AND AGENCY: AN ANTHROPOLOGICAL THEORY 219 (1998) ("Marquesan style is only the sedimented product of an infinite number of tiny social initiatives taken by Marquesan artists over a long period of historical development.").
8. See generally KATHERINE S. NEWMAN, LAW AND ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PREINDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES, esp. 205-06 (1983) (analyzing property-like notions in largely oral cultures); GOODY, supra note 4, ch. 4 (distinguishing how oral and written laws develop).
9. See generally KATHERINE S. NEWMAN, LAW AND ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PREINDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES, esp. 205-06 (1983) (analyzing property-like notions in largely oral cultures); GOODY, supra note 4, ch. 4 (distinguishing how oral and written laws develop).
10. See generally Peter Sutton, Dreamings, in DREAMINGS: THE ART OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA 13, 22 (Peter Sutton ed., 1988); Eric Michaels, Aboriginal Content: Who's Got It? Who Needs It?, in BAD ABORIGINAL ART: TRADITION, MEDIA, AND TECHNOLOGICAL HORIZONS 21, 31-32 (1994) (both touching on variables, such as status, knowledge, kinship, locality, etc., that bear on complex Aboriginal law on point). See, e.g., Bulun Bulun v. R. & T. Textiles Pty. Ltd., 41 I.P.R. 513 (1998) (Federal Court, Australia) (while finding analogs in Aboriginal law to copyright, declining to enforce those analogs by recourse to Australian copyright law, but rather fashioning remedies for them by reference to principles of equity).
11. See generally Peter Sutton, Dreamings, in DREAMINGS: THE ART OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA 13, 22 (Peter Sutton ed., 1988); Eric Michaels, Aboriginal Content: Who's Got It? Who Needs It?, in BAD ABORIGINAL ART: TRADITION, MEDIA, AND TECHNOLOGICAL HORIZONS 21, 31-32 (1994) (both touching on variables, such as status, knowledge, kinship, locality, etc., that bear on complex Aboriginal law on point). See, e.g., Bulun Bulun v. R. & T. Textiles Pty. Ltd., 41 I.P.R. 513 (1998) (Federal Court, Australia) (while finding analogs in Aboriginal law to copyright, declining to enforce those analogs by recourse to Australian copyright law, but rather fashioning remedies for them by reference to principles of equity).
12. See generally Peter Sutton, Dreamings, in DREAMINGS: THE ART OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA 13, 22 (Peter Sutton ed., 1988); Eric Michaels, Aboriginal Content: Who's Got It? Who Needs It?, in BAD ABORIGINAL ART: TRADITION, MEDIA, AND TECHNOLOGICAL HORIZONS 21, 31-32 (1994) (both touching on variables, such as status, knowledge, kinship, locality, etc., that bear on complex Aboriginal law on point). See, e.g., Bulun Bulun v. R. & T. Textiles Pty. Ltd., 41 I.P.R. 513 (1998) (Federal Court, Australia) (while finding analogs in Aboriginal law to copyright, declining to enforce those analogs by recourse to Australian copyright law, but rather fashioning remedies for them by reference to principles of equity).
13. See, e.g., John von Sturmer, Aboriginal Singing and Notions of Power, in SONGS OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA 63 (Margaret Clunies Ross et al., eds., 1987) (explaining how bards control tribal songs by specialization, allowing them to vary and accentuate the charismatic impact of performances); Alfred Gell, The Technology of Enchantment and the Enchantment of Technology, in ANTHROPOLOGY, ART, AND AESTHETICS 40 (Jeremy Coote & Anthony Shelton eds., 1992) (how artisans control tribal art as technical virtuosos instilling artifacts with magical influences).
14. See, e.g., John von Sturmer, Aboriginal Singing and Notions of Power, in SONGS OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA 63 (Margaret Clunies Ross et al., eds., 1987) (explaining how bards control tribal songs by specialization, allowing them to vary and accentuate the charismatic impact of performances); Alfred Gell, The Technology of Enchantment and the Enchantment of Technology, in ANTHROPOLOGY, ART, AND AESTHETICS 40 (Jeremy Coote & Anthony Shelton eds., 1992) (how artisans control tribal art as technical virtuosos instilling artifacts with magical influences).
15. See, e.g., Peter Sutton, Mystery and Change, in SONGS OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA, supra note 9, at 77 (exploring who is entitled to sing songs); HOWARD MORPHY, ABORIGINAL ART 158 (1998) (how artistic forms are transmitted "on the basis of kinship and ritual links"); ROBERT BRAIN, ART AND SOCIETY IN AFRICA 262-67 (1980) (how artistic know-how in Africa is passed on through kinship, corporate, and other groups); JUDITH PERANI & NORMA H. WOLFF, CLOTH, DRESS AND ART PATRONAGE IN AFRICA, ch. 3 (1999) (how artists are supported).
16. See, e.g., Peter Sutton, Mystery and Change, in SONGS OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA, supra note 9, at 77 (exploring who is entitled to sing songs); HOWARD MORPHY, ABORIGINAL ART 158 (1998) (how artistic forms are transmitted "on the basis of kinship and ritual links"); ROBERT BRAIN, ART AND SOCIETY IN AFRICA 262-67 (1980) (how artistic know-how in Africa is passed on through kinship, corporate, and other groups); JUDITH PERANI & NORMA H. WOLFF, CLOTH, DRESS AND ART PATRONAGE IN AFRICA, ch. 3 (1999) (how artists are supported).
17. See, e.g., Peter Sutton, Mystery and Change, in SONGS OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA, supra note 9, at 77 (exploring who is entitled to sing songs); HOWARD MORPHY, ABORIGINAL ART 158 (1998) (how artistic forms are transmitted "on the basis of kinship and ritual links"); ROBERT BRAIN, ART AND SOCIETY IN AFRICA 262-67 (1980) (how artistic know-how in Africa is passed on through kinship, corporate, and other groups); JUDITH PERANI & NORMA H. WOLFF, CLOTH, DRESS AND ART PATRONAGE IN AFRICA, ch. 3 (1999) (how artists are supported).
18. See, e.g., Peter Sutton, Mystery and Change, in SONGS OF ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIA, supra note 9, at 77 (exploring who is entitled to sing songs); HOWARD MORPHY, ABORIGINAL ART 158 (1998) (how artistic forms are transmitted "on the basis of kinship and ritual links"); ROBERT BRAIN, ART AND SOCIETY IN AFRICA 262-67 (1980) (how artistic know-how in Africa is passed on through kinship, corporate, and other groups); JUDITH PERANI & NORMA H. WOLFF, CLOTH, DRESS AND ART PATRONAGE IN AFRICA, ch. 3 (1999) (how artists are supported).
19. As an example of this illusion, consider what some consider to be "history's first copyright case." The monk Columba, in the middle of the first millennium of this era, reportedly transcribed the abbot Finnian's manuscript of the Psalms, only to have the Celtic King Diarmait rule: "To every cow her calf; to every book its copy." But this report only appeared in uncorroborated sources compiled a millennium later, and the legal bases of the decision are at best susceptible of only speculative reconstruction. See J.A.L. STERLING, WORLD COPYRIGHT LAW 1027-28 (1998). Indeed, most reports of old Irish law have been largely filtered through Christian sources, whose perspective was not sympathetic to preexisting, pagan Celtic culture. See D.A. Binchey, Introductory Matter, in CORPUS IURIS HIBERNICI, ix-xii (1978).
20. As an example of this illusion, consider what some consider to be "history's first copyright case." The monk Columba, in the middle of the first millennium of this era, reportedly transcribed the abbot Finnian's manuscript of the Psalms, only to have the Celtic King Diarmait rule: "To every cow her calf; to every book its copy." But this report only appeared in uncorroborated sources compiled a millennium later, and the legal bases of the decision are at best susceptible of only speculative reconstruction. See J.A.L. STERLING, WORLD COPYRIGHT LAW 1027-28 (1998). Indeed, most reports of old Irish law have been largely filtered through Christian sources, whose perspective was not sympathetic to preexisting, pagan Celtic culture. See D.A. Binchey, Introductory Matter, in CORPUS IURIS HIBERNICI, ix-xii (1978).
21. See 5 ATHENAEUS, THE DEIPNOSOPHISTS 349 (Charles Burton Gulick trans., Loeb Classics 1963) (recounting that the Sybarites, in Magna Graecia, accorded cooks a statutory monopoly, limited in time, in their new dishes). Cf. Mario Fabiani, Diritto di autore gastronomico, 58 DIRITTO DI AUTORE 116 (1987) (explaining that such protection could conceivably apply, in patent-like fashion, to the actual technique of preparing a dish or, in copyright-like fashion, to the text of a recipe or, arguably, to the resulting taste: the "proof of the pudding").
22. See 5 ATHENAEUS, THE DEIPNOSOPHISTS 349 (Charles Burton Gulick trans., Loeb Classics 1963) (recounting that the Sybarites, in Magna Graecia, accorded cooks a statutory monopoly, limited in time, in their new dishes). Cf. Mario Fabiani, Diritto di autore gastronomico, 58 DIRITTO DI AUTORE 116 (1987) (explaining that such protection could conceivably apply, in patent-like fashion, to the actual technique of preparing a dish or, in copyright-like fashion, to the text of a recipe or, arguably, to the resulting taste: the "proof of the pudding").
23. See INNIS, supra note 4, at 59-61, 78-81; HAVELOCK, supra note 5, at 291-94.
24. See FREDERIC G. KENYON, BOOKS AND READERS IN ANCIENT GREECE AND ROME 8-26 (2d ed. 1951).
25. See H.C. BALDRY, THE GREEK TRAGIC THEATRE, ch. 4 passim (1971).
26. See id. at 131-32.
27. Id. at 15.
28. These empires have the advantage for us of having been relatively isolated from each other, so that the issue of mutual influence is largely mooted. See 1 JOSEPH NEEDHAM, SCIENCE AND CIVILISATION IN CHINA, ch. 7 (1954).
29. See, e.g., WALTER BAPPERT, WEGE ZUM URHEBERRECHT 26-39 passim (1962) (positing that the classic Greeks and Romans, with pagan theories of inspiration by the muses, could not conceive of rights based on individual authorship); WILLIAM ALFORD, TO STEAL A BOOK IS AN ELEGANT OFFENSE: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW IN CHINESE CIVILIZATION, ch. 2 (1995) (invoking the classic Chinese practice of copying old masters, coupled with the use of law for censorship purposes, to explain the absence of copyright even after the Chinese invented the printing press).
30. See, e.g., WALTER BAPPERT, WEGE ZUM URHEBERRECHT 26-39 passim (1962) (positing that the classic Greeks and Romans, with pagan theories of inspiration by the muses, could not conceive of rights based on individual authorship); WILLIAM ALFORD, TO STEAL A BOOK IS AN ELEGANT OFFENSE: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW IN CHINESE CIVILIZATION, ch. 2 (1995) (invoking the classic Chinese practice of copying old masters, coupled with the use of law for censorship purposes, to explain the absence of copyright even after the Chinese invented the printing press).
31. For methodological options, see RAYMOND WILLIAMS, THE SOCIOLOGY OF CULTURE, esp. ch. 1 (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1991) (1981).
32. See MARIE-CLAUDE DOCK, ÉTUDE SUR LE DROIT D'AUTEUR, 12-15 (1963); BAPPERT, supra note 19, at 48-50.
33. See MARIE-CLAUDE DOCK, ÉTUDE SUR LE DROIT D'AUTEUR, 12-15 (1963); BAPPERT, supra note 19, at 48-50.
34. Compare DOCK, supra note 21, at 12-15 (seeing no such obstacle to extending Roman property notions to intangibles such as texts), with BAPPERT, supra note 19, at 46-47 (doubting that Roman legal doctrine could admit economic worth in an intangible). See also supra text accompanying note 12 (pointing out that one Greek city-state in Italy had already experimented with legislating intellectual property in culinary dishes).
35. Cf. BAPPERT, supra note 19, at 48-49 (also giving other reasons why so few of the same texts were manufactured and marketed by different Roman publishers).
36. See LUCIEN FEBVRE & HENRI-JEAN MARTIN, THE COMING OF THE BOOK: THE IMPACT OF PRINTING 1450-1800, 72-76 (Geoffrey Nowell-Smith & David Wootton eds., David Gerard trans., 1976).
37. See Zheng Chengsi, Printing and Publishing in China and Foreign Countries and the Evolution of the Concept of Copyright, [1987] 4 CHINA PATENTS & TRADEMARKS 41 (Part I), [1988] 1 CHINA PATENTS & TRADEMARKS 47 (Part II).
38. See Zheng Chengsi, Printing and Publishing in China and Foreign Countries and the Evolution of the Concept of Copyright, [1987] 4 CHINA PATENTS & TRADEMARKS 41 (Part I), [1988] 1 CHINA PATENTS & TRADEMARKS 47 (Part II).
39. See ALFORD, supra note 19, at 13-17.
40. See generally William Alford, On the Limits of "Grand Theory" in Comparative Law, 61 WASH. L. REV. 945 (1986) (critiquing culturalist theories of Chinese legal trends).
41. Cf. Zheng Chengsi, Further on Copyright Protection in Ancient China, [1996] 4 CHINA PATENTS & TRADEMARKS 62 (noting this parallel and critiquing Alford's culturalist theory of imperial Chinese regulation of the book trade).
42. For analyses of the transition from medieval to modern conditions, see DOUGLASS C. NORTH & ROBERT PAUL THOMAS, THE RISE OF THE WESTERN WORLD: A NEW ECONOMIC HISTORY 79-89 (1973); LUCIANO PELLICANI, THE GENESIS OF CAPITALISM AND THE ORIGINS OF MODERNITY, chs. 4-7 passim (1994).
43. For analyses of the transition from medieval to modern conditions, see DOUGLASS C. NORTH & ROBERT PAUL THOMAS, THE RISE OF THE WESTERN WORLD: A NEW ECONOMIC HISTORY 79-89 (1973); LUCIANO PELLICANI, THE GENESIS OF CAPITALISM AND THE ORIGINS OF MODERNITY, chs. 4-7 passim (1994).
44. See e.g., MARJORIE PLANT, THE ENGLISH BOOK TRADE: AN ECONOMIC HISTORY OF THE MAKING AND SALE OF BOOKS 102-03 (3rd ed. 1974) (explaining process in the English book trade); NORTH & THOMAS, supra note 29, at 98-100 (also noting that these monopolies were often sold to fill state coffers).
45. See FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 140-42; BAPPERT, supra note 19, at 178-216 passim.
46. The pre-copyright and copyright regimes analyzed here may be called "paradigms" in the broad sense of the term. For an account of this sense, see THOMAS S. KUHN, THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS 174-91 (2d ed. 1970).
47. See CHRISTOPHER HILL, THE CENTURY OF REVOLUTION, 1603-1714, 30-31 (1961).
48. See Sheila Lambert, State Control of the Press in Theory and Practice: the Role of the Stationers' Company before 1640, in CENSORSHIP AND THE CONTROL OF PRINT IN ENGLAND AND FRANCE 1600-1910, 1 (Robin Myers & Michael Harris eds., 1992).
49. LYMAN RAY PATTERSON, COPYRIGHT IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 29 (1968).
50. See PLANT, supra note 30, at 100-04; JOHN FEATHER, PUBLISHING, PIRACY AND POLITICS: AN HISTORICAL STUDY OF COPYRIGHT IN BRITAIN, chs. 1-2 passim (1994).
51. See PLANT, supra note 30, at 100-04; JOHN FEATHER, PUBLISHING, PIRACY AND POLITICS: AN HISTORICAL STUDY OF COPYRIGHT IN BRITAIN, chs. 1-2 passim (1994).
52. See PATTERSON, supra note 35, at 36-41, chs. 5-6 passim.
53. Cf. AUGUSTINE BIRRELL, SEVEN LECTURES ON THE LAW AND HISTORY OF COPYRIGHT IN BOOKS 53 (Rothman Reprints 1971) (1899) (contrasting English and French historical developments).
54. See FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 307; also 1 AUGUSTIN-CHARLES RENOUARD, TRAITÉ DES DROITS D'AUTEURS 32-34 (1838) (recounting how, in 1518, the Sorbonne put up posters asserting its jurisdiction to stop the publication of the Concordat of Francois I and Leon X, only to have the Crown deny this jurisdiction and empower the Parliament in Paris to authorize "some good and diligent printers" to publish the document).
55. See FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 307; also 1 AUGUSTIN-CHARLES RENOUARD, TRAITÉ DES DROITS D'AUTEURS 32-34 (1838) (recounting how, in 1518, the Sorbonne put up posters asserting its jurisdiction to stop the publication of the Concordat of Francois I and Leon X, only to have the Crown deny this jurisdiction and empower the Parliament in Paris to authorize "some good and diligent printers" to publish the document).
56. See DOCK, supra note 21, at 88-97.
57. See FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 239-47; DOCK, supra note 21, at 66-75, 96-97; ROBERT DARNTON, THE LITERARY UNDERGROUND OF THE OLD REGIME 185-90 (1982).
58. See FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 239-47; DOCK, supra note 21, at 66-75, 96-97; ROBERT DARNTON, THE LITERARY UNDERGROUND OF THE OLD REGIME 185-90 (1982).
59. The Italians were the pioneers in these developments. See, e.g., Paul F. Grendler, The Roman Inquisition and the Venetian Press 1540-1605, 1975 J. MODERN HISTORY 47, 48 (explaining that Venice was the first major European publishing center, where more than eight million books were printed in the second half of the sixteenth century); STERLING, supra note 11, at 995-96 (setting out texts and translations of early Venetian printing privileges).
60. See BENJAMIN KAPLAN, AN UNHURRIED VIEW OF COPYRIGHT 5 (1967); PATTERSON, supra note 35, at 46-64.
61. 1 STEPHAN P. LADAS, THE INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION OF LITERARY AND ARTISTIC PROPERTY 15 (1938).
62. See PATTERSON, supra note 35, at 47-49.
63. See FEATHER, supra note 36, at 24-30.
64. See ADRIAN JOHNS, THE NATURE OF THE BOOK: PRINT AND KNOWLEDGE IN THE MAKING 213-35, 246, 263 (1998).
65. See 1 RENOUARD, supra note 39, at 62-225 passim; DOCK, supra note 21, at 65-75.
66. See DARNTON, supra note 41, at 185-88.
67. FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 241.
68. See PLANT, supra note 30, at 98-99, 114 (noting trade in manuscripts in medieval times). Cf. DOCK, supra note 21, at 56-61 (indicating common ownership of manuscripts generated in monasteries).
69. The Renaissance Italians were precocious in granting authors entitlements in their works. See, e.g., 2 GEORGE HAVEN PUTNAM, BOOKS AND THEIR MAKERS DURING THE MIDDLE AGES 363 (1896-97) (noting the Venetian decree of 1544-5 which required author's consent before publishing a work). See also PLANT, supra note 30, at 109 (giving examples of rare English book patents granted to authors); DOCK, supra note 21, at 82-83 (rare French privileges granted to authors).
70. Quoted in 1 PAUL OLAGNIER, LE DROIT D'AUTEUR 85 (1934). Molière himself had tumultuous relations even with print publishers with whom he contracted. See RAMON FERNANDEZ, MOLIÈRE, THE MAN SEEN THROUGH THE PLAYS 62-68 (Wilson Follett trans., 1958). The relations between staging and publishing plays were also muddled in England from the fifteenth to the eighteenth century. See DAVID SAUNDERS, AUTHORSHIP AND COPYRIGHT 41-45 (1992).
71. Quoted in 1 PAUL OLAGNIER, LE DROIT D'AUTEUR 85 (1934). Molière himself had tumultuous relations even with print publishers with whom he contracted. See RAMON FERNANDEZ, MOLIÈRE, THE MAN SEEN THROUGH THE PLAYS 62-68 (Wilson Follett trans., 1958). The relations between staging and publishing plays were also muddled in England from the fifteenth to the eighteenth century. See DAVID SAUNDERS, AUTHORSHIP AND COPYRIGHT 41-45 (1992).
72. Quoted in 1 PAUL OLAGNIER, LE DROIT D'AUTEUR 85 (1934). Molière himself had tumultuous relations even with print publishers with whom he contracted. See RAMON FERNANDEZ, MOLIÈRE, THE MAN SEEN THROUGH THE PLAYS 62-68 (Wilson Follett trans., 1958). The relations between staging and publishing plays were also muddled in England from the fifteenth to the eighteenth century. See DAVID SAUNDERS, AUTHORSHIP AND COPYRIGHT 41-45 (1992).
73. In an example often cited, Milton contracted for the publication of Paradise Lost in 1667, granting both the "Manuscript" and the "Booke Copy" of the work, while warranting quiet title. This example is all the more interesting because Milton, in his Areopagitica, was developing notions of modern authorship. See MARK ROSE, AUTHORS AND OWNERS: THE INVENTION OF COPYRIGHT 27-30 (1993); Peter Lindenbaum, Milton's Contract, 10 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 439 (1992).
74. In an example often cited, Milton contracted for the publication of Paradise Lost in 1667, granting both the "Manuscript" and the "Booke Copy" of the work, while warranting quiet title. This example is all the more interesting because Milton, in his Areopagitica, was developing notions of modern authorship. See MARK ROSE, AUTHORS AND OWNERS: THE INVENTION OF COPYRIGHT 27-30 (1993); Peter Lindenbaum, Milton's Contract, 10 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 439 (1992).
75. In an example often cited, Milton contracted for the publication of Paradise Lost in 1667, granting both the "Manuscript" and the "Booke Copy" of the work, while warranting quiet title. This example is all the more interesting because Milton, in his Areopagitica, was developing notions of modern authorship. See MARK ROSE, AUTHORS AND OWNERS: THE INVENTION OF COPYRIGHT 27-30 (1993); Peter Lindenbaum, Milton's Contract, 10 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 439 (1992).
76. See, e.g., FEATHER, supra note 36, at 30 (explaining arrangements between playwrights and Elizabethan theaters); PAULINA KEWES, AUTHORSHIP AND APPROPRIATION: WRITING FOR THE STAGE IN ENGLAND, 1660-1710, ch. 1 (1998) (such arrangements after the Restoration); DOCK, supra note 21, at 98-110 (arrangements in French theater).
77. See, e.g., FEATHER, supra note 36, at 30 (explaining arrangements between playwrights and Elizabethan theaters); PAULINA KEWES, AUTHORSHIP AND APPROPRIATION: WRITING FOR THE STAGE IN ENGLAND, 1660-1710, ch. 1 (1998) (such arrangements after the Restoration); DOCK, supra note 21, at 98-110 (arrangements in French theater).
78. For further analysis, see THEODORE F.T. PLUCKNETT, A CONCISE HISTORY OF THE COMMON LAW, chs. 7-10 (5th ed. 1956); JOHN A. CAREY, JUDICIAL REFORM IN FRANCE BEFORE THE REVOLUTION OF 1789, chs. 1-3 (1981).
79. For further analysis, see THEODORE F.T. PLUCKNETT, A CONCISE HISTORY OF THE COMMON LAW, chs. 7-10 (5th ed. 1956); JOHN A. CAREY, JUDICIAL REFORM IN FRANCE BEFORE THE REVOLUTION OF 1789, chs. 1-3 (1981).
80. See BIRRELL, supra note 38, at 58-64; PATTERSON, supra note 35, 46-64; JOHNS, supra note 47, at 221-27. But cf. FEATHER, supra note 36, at 44 (indicating that, in the 1662 Printing Act, Parliament began to extend the jurisdiction of common-law courts in the field).
81. See CARLA HESSE, PUBLISHING AND CULTURAL POLITICS IN REVOLUTIONARY PARIS, 1789-1810, 10-15 (1991).
82. See Harold Demsetz, Information and Efficiency: Another Viewpoint, 12 J. LAW & ECON. 1 (1969).
83. For an overview of this development across world history, see FERNAND RAUDEL, AFTERTHOUGHTS ON MATERIAL CIVILIZATION AND CAPITALISM, chs. 1-3 passim (1985).
84. See INNIS, supra note 4, at 148-49, 154; NORTH & THOMAS, supra note 29, at 135-42; IMMANUEL WALLERSTEIN, THE MODERN WORLD-SYSTEM II: MERCANTILISM AND THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE EUROPEAN WORLD-ECONOMY 55-59 (1980).
85. See INNIS, supra note 4, at 148-49, 154; NORTH & THOMAS, supra note 29, at 135-42; IMMANUEL WALLERSTEIN, THE MODERN WORLD-SYSTEM II: MERCANTILISM AND THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE EUROPEAN WORLD-ECONOMY 55-59 (1980).
86. See ELIZABETH L. EISENSTEIN, THE PRINTING PRESS AS AN AGENT OF CHANGE: COMMUNICATIONS AND CULTURAL TRANSFORMATIONS IN EARLY-MODERN EUROPE 136-42 (one vol. ed. 1980); JÜRGEN HABERMAS, THE STRUCTURAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE: AN INQUIRY INTO A CATEGORY OF BOURGEOIS SOCIETY 29-43 (Thomas Burger trans., 1989); JOHNS, supra note 47, at 111-26.
87. See ELIZABETH L. EISENSTEIN, THE PRINTING PRESS AS AN AGENT OF CHANGE: COMMUNICATIONS AND CULTURAL TRANSFORMATIONS IN EARLY-MODERN EUROPE 136-42 (one vol. ed. 1980); JÜRGEN HABERMAS, THE STRUCTURAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE: AN INQUIRY INTO A CATEGORY OF BOURGEOIS SOCIETY 29-43 (Thomas Burger trans., 1989); JOHNS, supra note 47, at 111-26.
88. See EISENSTEIN, supra note 62, at 143-45, 416-20, 646-47; DARNTON, supra note 41, chs. 4-5 passim.
89. See PLANT, supra note 30, at 116-17, 261-62; FEATHER, supra note 36, at 21-23; JOHNS, supra note 47, at 128-36, 160-74.
90. See FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 196-97, 237-39, 299-304; DARNTON, supra note 41, at 122, 183-85; HESSE, supra note 58, at 17-19.
91. See HILL, supra note 33, at 262-64, 267 (explaining how royal monopolies ended in England); also HESSE, supra note 58, at 41 (explaining that most industrial and commercial monopolies ended before those of the book trade in France). Cf. BRAD SHERMAN & LIONEL BENTLY, THE MAKING OF MODERN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW: THE BRITISH EXPERIENCE, 1760-1911, 208-10 (1999) (noting the incremental role of the Statute of Monopolies in the evolution of British intellectual property).
92. See HILL, supra note 33, at 262-64, 267 (explaining how royal monopolies ended in England); also HESSE, supra note 58, at 41 (explaining that most industrial and commercial monopolies ended before those of the book trade in France). Cf. BRAD SHERMAN & LIONEL BENTLY, THE MAKING OF MODERN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW: THE BRITISH EXPERIENCE, 1760-1911, 208-10 (1999) (noting the incremental role of the Statute of Monopolies in the evolution of British intellectual property).
93. In Germany, not yet politically centralized, publishers from different regions, coming together in book fairs, themselves developed trade regulations to discourage pirating from region to region. See Martin Vogel, Deutsche Urheber-und Verlagsrechtsgeschichte zwischen 1450 und 1850, 19 ARCHIV FÜR GESCHICHTE DES BUCHWESENS 2 (1978).
94. See Peter Prescott, The Origins of Copyright: A Debunking View, [1989] 12 EUR. INTELL. PROP. REV. 453.
95. Pleadings by the counsel Marion in the Muret case before the Parlement of Paris, March 15, 1586, quoted in DOCK, supra note 21, at 78-79.
96. See OLAGNIER, supra note 53, at 95; DOCK, supra note 21, at 118-21.
97. See OLAGNIER, supra note 53, at 90-95, 105-10; DARNTON, supra note 41, at 186-90; HESSE, supra note 58, at 41-44.
98. See supra text accompanying note 30.
99. Cf. FEATHER, supra note 36, at 56 ("the whole public debate had revolved around censorship . . . and the property rights of publishers").
100. See generally JACOB BURCKHARDT, THE CIVILIZATION OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ITALY 81-93 (Phaidon 1945) (S.G.C. Middlemore trans., 2d ed. 1878) (giving examples of individual artists, such as Alberti and Da Vinci, whom the Renaissance glorified for their creativity).
101. Cf. Michel Foucault, What Is an Author?, in TEXTUAL STRATEGIES: PERSPECTIVES IN POST-STRUCTURALIST CRITICISM 141 (Josué V. Harari ed., 1979) (raising the question of when and how, in modern times, the notion of the individual "author" began to be invoked to explain the tenor of texts).
102. See MARSHALL MCLUHAN, THE GUTENBERG GALAXY 130-37 (1962); EISENSTEIN, supra note 62, at 132-36, 228-37. But cf. PELLICANI, supra note 29, at 179-80 (stressing opening up of marketplace as forcing individuals back onto their own inner resources); HABERMAS, supra note 62, at 43-51 (pointing to changes in family arrangements, coupled with reading patterns, in the rise of private, individual self-consciousness); JOHNS, supra note 47, ch. 6 (tracing out ambivalent modern responses to individual casts of mind prompted by reading).
103. See EISENSTEIN, supra note 62, at 239-40; ROSE, supra note 54, ch. 7 (1993); Martha Woodmansee, The Genius and the Copyright: Economic and Legal Conditions of the Emergence of the "Author," 17 EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY STUDIES 425 (1984).
104. See EISENSTEIN, supra note 62, at 239-40; ROSE, supra note 54, ch. 7 (1993); Martha Woodmansee, The Genius and the Copyright: Economic and Legal Conditions of the Emergence of the "Author," 17 EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY STUDIES 425 (1984).
105. Cf. KEWES, supra note 55, at 128-29 ("I suggest that to accord priority to developments originating in positive law is to limit our understanding of the process by which social and critical conceptions of authorship were formed.").
106. See MARTIN WARNKE, THE COURT ARTIST: ON THE ANCESTRY OF THE MODERN ARTIST 143-55 (David McLintock trans., 1993); also BRAM KEMPERS, PAINTING, POWER, AND PATRONAGE: THE RISE OF THE PROFESSIONAL ARTIST IN THE ITALIAN RENAISSANCE (Beverley Jackson trans., 1992) (laying out Italian trends, on the one hand, from commissions by religious orders and then urban centers to positions with aristocrats and, on the other, from guild governance to professional independence).
107. See MARTIN WARNKE, THE COURT ARTIST: ON THE ANCESTRY OF THE MODERN ARTIST 143-55 (David McLintock trans., 1993); also BRAM KEMPERS, PAINTING, POWER, AND PATRONAGE: THE RISE OF THE PROFESSIONAL ARTIST IN THE ITALIAN RENAISSANCE (Beverley Jackson trans., 1992) (laying out Italian trends, on the one hand, from commissions by religious orders and then urban centers to positions with aristocrats and, on the other, from guild governance to professional independence).
108. See GEORGIO VASARI, LIVES OF THE ARTISTS 263-67 (Simon & Schuster, Betty Burroughs ed., 1946) (J. Foster trans., 1850) (1568); 1 JOHN ADDINGTON SYMONDS, THE LIFE OF MICHELANGELO BUONARROTI 152-59, 176-87, 198-99 (2d. ed. 1893).
109. See GEORGIO VASARI, LIVES OF THE ARTISTS 263-67 (Simon & Schuster, Betty Burroughs ed., 1946) (J. Foster trans., 1850) (1568); 1 JOHN ADDINGTON SYMONDS, THE LIFE OF MICHELANGELO BUONARROTI 152-59, 176-87, 198-99 (2d. ed. 1893).
110. See, e.g., 2 PUTNAM, supra note 52, at 370 (indicating direct Venetian grants entitling Ariosto, Aretino, and Tasso to publish their own works).
111. See, e.g., FEATHER, supra note 36, at 40 (indicating that English law started to require authors' consent to publication in 1642, but only to identify authors of unacceptable books); Harold A. Innis, The English Publishing Trade in the Eighteenth Century, in THE BIAS OF COMMUNICATION 142, 149-50 (Univ. of Toronto Press, 2d ed. 1995) (1951) (explaining that eighteenth-century English writers were still "at the mercy" of monopolistic London publishers); EISENSTEIN, supra note 62, at 145-48 (describing the ambivalent position of French "men of letters" in early-modern French and European society).
112. See, e.g., FEATHER, supra note 36, at 40 (indicating that English law started to require authors' consent to publication in 1642, but only to identify authors of unacceptable books); Harold A. Innis, The English Publishing Trade in the Eighteenth Century, in THE BIAS OF COMMUNICATION 142, 149-50 (Univ. of Toronto Press, 2d ed. 1995) (1951) (explaining that eighteenth-century English writers were still "at the mercy" of monopolistic London publishers); EISENSTEIN, supra note 62, at 145-48 (describing the ambivalent position of French "men of letters" in early-modern French and European society).
113. ALFRED EINSTEIN, A SHORT HISTORY OF MUSIC 142 (4th ed. 1954). See, e.g., Richard Petzoldt, The Economic Conditions of the 18th-Century Musician, in THE SOCIAL STATUS OF THE PROFESSIONAL MUSICIAN FROM THE MIDDLE AGES TO THE 19TH CENTURY 159 (Walter Salmen ed., Herbert Kaufman & Barbara Reisner Irans., 1983) (detailing the economic insecurities and indignities suffered by court musicians); JACQUES ATTALI, BRUITS: ESSAI SUR L'ÉCONOMIE POLITIQUE DE LA MUSIQUE 28-34, 81-127 passim (1977) (surveying changes in the status of musicians from early modern times to the present).
114. ALFRED EINSTEIN, A SHORT HISTORY OF MUSIC 142 (4th ed. 1954). See, e.g., Richard Petzoldt, The Economic Conditions of the 18th-Century Musician, in THE SOCIAL STATUS OF THE PROFESSIONAL MUSICIAN FROM THE MIDDLE AGES TO THE 19TH CENTURY 159 (Walter Salmen ed., Herbert Kaufman & Barbara Reisner Irans., 1983) (detailing the economic insecurities and indignities suffered by court musicians); JACQUES ATTALI, BRUITS: ESSAI SUR L'ÉCONOMIE POLITIQUE DE LA MUSIQUE 28-34, 81-127 passim (1977) (surveying changes in the status of musicians from early modern times to the present).
115. ALFRED EINSTEIN, A SHORT HISTORY OF MUSIC 142 (4th ed. 1954). See, e.g., Richard Petzoldt, The Economic Conditions of the 18th-Century Musician, in THE SOCIAL STATUS OF THE PROFESSIONAL MUSICIAN FROM THE MIDDLE AGES TO THE 19TH CENTURY 159 (Walter Salmen ed., Herbert Kaufman & Barbara Reisner Irans., 1983) (detailing the economic insecurities and indignities suffered by court musicians); JACQUES ATTALI, BRUITS: ESSAI SUR L'ÉCONOMIE POLITIQUE DE LA MUSIQUE 28-34, 81-127 passim (1977) (surveying changes in the status of musicians from early modern times to the present).
116. See, e.g., FEATHER, supra note 36, at 55, 67 (minimizing the influence of authors on the 1710 legislation, while quoting Defoe as opposing the renewal of licensing the Stationers to avoid making the press "a slave to party"). But cf. ROSE, supra note 54, at 34-41 (stressing Defoe's and Addison's introduction of the property metaphor).
117. See DOCK, supra note 21, at 143-54; HESSE, supra note 58, at 115-17.
118. See, e.g., John Locke, Memorandum (written circa 1694), reprinted in LORD PETER KING, THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF JOHN LOCKE 202-09 (Bell & Daldy, new ed. 1864) (critiquing old Stationers' regime as both subject to capricious interpretation and resulting in poorly printed, inaccurate, and costly books, while pointing out that Dutch publishers, under a more liberal regime, outcompeted the English); DENIS DIDEROT, SUR LA LIBERTÉ DE LA PRESSE 50, 67 (Jacques Proust ed., Éditions sociales 1964), first published as LETTRE SUR LE COMMERCE DE LA LIBRAIRIE (1861) (critiquing censorship while arguing for publisher's copyright).
119. See, e.g., John Locke, Memorandum (written circa 1694), reprinted in LORD PETER KING, THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF JOHN LOCKE 202-09 (Bell & Daldy, new ed. 1864) (critiquing old Stationers' regime as both subject to capricious interpretation and resulting in poorly printed, inaccurate, and costly books, while pointing out that Dutch publishers, under a more liberal regime, outcompeted the English); DENIS DIDEROT, SUR LA LIBERTÉ DE LA PRESSE 50, 67 (Jacques Proust ed., Éditions sociales 1964), first published as LETTRE SUR LE COMMERCE DE LA LIBRAIRIE (1861) (critiquing censorship while arguing for publisher's copyright).
120. See, e.g., John Locke, Memorandum (written circa 1694), reprinted in LORD PETER KING, THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF JOHN LOCKE 202-09 (Bell & Daldy, new ed. 1864) (critiquing old Stationers' regime as both subject to capricious interpretation and resulting in poorly printed, inaccurate, and costly books, while pointing out that Dutch publishers, under a more liberal regime, outcompeted the English); DENIS DIDEROT, SUR LA LIBERTÉ DE LA PRESSE 50, 67 (Jacques Proust ed., Éditions sociales 1964), first published as LETTRE SUR LE COMMERCE DE LA LIBRAIRIE (1861) (critiquing censorship while arguing for publisher's copyright).
121. For an overview of the debate in England, France, and Germany, with further references to original and secondary sources, see SAUNDERS, supra note 53, chs. 2-4.
122. OLIVER GOLDSMITH, THE CITIZEN OF THE WORLD AND THE BEE 233 (Austin Dobson, ed., Everyman's Library 1934) (1762).
123. For the history of this shift in power, see FEATHER, supra note 36, ch. 2.
124. Raymond Astbury, The Renewal of the Licensing Act in 1693 and its Lapse in 1695, 33 LIBRARY 296, 311 (1978).
125. KAPLAN, supra note 43, at 6.
126. 8 Anne, ch. 19 (1710). Prior owners of "copies" of already published books, most often Stationers, obtained protection for twenty-one years from enactment. Enforcement was subject to registration with the Stationers "in such manner as hath been usual." For the statutory text, see STERLING, supra note 11, at 996-99.
127. See supra text accompanying note 45.
128. See PLANT, supra note 30, at 118-19; FEATHER, supra note 36, at 67, 80.
129. See, e.g., Bach v. Longman (1777) 2 Cowper 623 (extending Statute of Anne to printed sheet music).
130. For example, the Engraving Copyright Act was passed in 1734 after pressure from artists, including William Hogarth, the Sculpture Copyright Act in 1798, and the Dramatic Copyright Act in 1833. Cf. SHERMAN & BENTLY, supra note 66, at 135 (quoting a nineteenth-century comment that cumulating British copyright statutes had left the "glorious muddle" of "eighteen acts of Parliament" before codification in 1911).
131. See HABERMAS, supra note 62, at 75-78.
132. See, e.g., STERLING, supra note 11, at 999 (setting out the Danish law); Howard B. Abrams, The Historic Foundation of American Copyright Law: Exploding the Myth of Common Law Copyright, 29 WAYNE L. REV. 1119, 1171-74 (1983) (reviewing North American colonial laws); MICHAEL BÜLOW, BUCHMARKT UND AUTORENEIGENTUM: DIE ENTSTEHUNG DES URHEBERGEDANKENS IN 18. JAHRHUNDERT 51-54 (1990) (quoting publishing law in the general Prussian code).
133. See, e.g., STERLING, supra note 11, at 999 (setting out the Danish law); Howard B. Abrams, The Historic Foundation of American Copyright Law: Exploding the Myth of Common Law Copyright, 29 WAYNE L. REV. 1119, 1171-74 (1983) (reviewing North American colonial laws); MICHAEL BÜLOW, BUCHMARKT UND AUTORENEIGENTUM: DIE ENTSTEHUNG DES URHEBERGEDANKENS IN 18. JAHRHUNDERT 51-54 (1990) (quoting publishing law in the general Prussian code).
134. See, e.g., STERLING, supra note 11, at 999 (setting out the Danish law); Howard B. Abrams, The Historic Foundation of American Copyright Law: Exploding the Myth of Common Law Copyright, 29 WAYNE L. REV. 1119, 1171-74 (1983) (reviewing North American colonial laws); MICHAEL BÜLOW, BUCHMARKT UND AUTORENEIGENTUM: DIE ENTSTEHUNG DES URHEBERGEDANKENS IN 18. JAHRHUNDERT 51-54 (1990) (quoting publishing law in the general Prussian code).
135. For the freeing of the French press, see HESSE, supra note 58, at 27-32.
136. See supra text accompanying note 85. For details on this entire legislative history, see 1 RENOUARD, supra note 39, at 299-331.
137. For the statutory texts, see STERLING, supra note 11, at 1002-07.
138. See FEATHER, supra note 36, at 81-94.
139. See Abrams, supra note 98, at 1142-56. But cf. PATTERSON, supra note 35, at 160-62 (indicating that injunctions were granted without references to the Statute of Anne, leaving open the argument a contrario that they were based on common law).
140. See generally SHERMAN & BENTLY, supra note 66, at 28-30, 39-40 (touching on the appeal of this argument at the time).
141. (1774) 2 Brown's Prerogative Cases. For critical accounts, see Abrams, supra note 98, at 1156-71; ROSE, supra note 54, ch. 6 and Appendix B.
142. Thus a key point in the French debate on literary property was resolved: Diderot had argued for perpetual property in works, while Condorcet argued against it, fearing that such copyright might restrict free inquiry. See HESSE, supra note 58, at 100-05.
143. er pluviôse, an IX, vol. I, 463-523), in NAISSANCE DU CODE CIVIL 41-42 (P.A. Fenet & François Ewald eds., 1989).
144. Compare HESSE, supra note 58, at 214-22 (noting that, right after the passage of the Laws of 1791 and 1793, piracy became rampant), with 2 RENOUARD, supra note 39, at 390-439 passim (tracing the development of provisional civil and criminal remedies in France through the first quarter of the nineteenth century).
145. See generally ALAIN STROWEL, DROIT D'AUTEUR ET COPYRIGHT: DIVERGENCES ET CONVERGENCES 145-46 (1993) (observing that such open codification allows judges flexibility in solving problems). See, e.g., SHERMAN & BENTLY, supra note 66, at 121 ("With France acting yet again as a role model, there was a demand for the [British copyright] law to be made as simple, uniform and precise as possible.").
146. Competition from new publishers did meet concerted resistance from established publishing houses. Compare PLANT, supra note 30, at 118-21, 222-24; FEATHER, supra note 36, at 65, 81 (noting new editions on British market, many from Scotland, but monopolistic "congers" of London publishers in the eighteenth century), with HESSE, supra note 58, at 17, 31-32, chs. 5-6 passim (noting new publishing projects but vicissitudes of the book trade during French Revolution).
147. FEBVRE & MARTIN, supra note 24, at 197.
148. Cf. HESSE, supra note 58, at 240-248 (indicating starting point for Parisian publishing in the nineteenth century).
149. For further analysis, see JAMES R. BENIGER, THE CONTROL REVOLUTION, esp. chs. 6-9 (1986).
150. Cf. II:1 STIG STRÖMHOLM, LE DROIT MORAL DE L'AUTEUR 76-80 (1966) (analyzing how the industrialized production and mass marketing of works impacts on authors' interests calling for protection by moral rights).
151. See Harold A. Innis, Technology and Public Opinion in the United States, in THE BIAS OF COMMUNICATION, supra note 82, at 156, 159-62; PLANT, supra note 30, ch. 13.
152. See generally Max Horkheimer & Theodor W. Adorno, The Culture Industry, in DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT 120 (J. Cumming trans., 1987) (analyzing the rise of culture industries). But cf. Walter Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, in ILLUMINATIONS: ESSAYS AND REFLECTIONS 217 (Hannah Arendt ed., Harry Zohn trans., new ed. 1972) (predicting the liquidation of the "aura" of works once these are captured by modern mass media).
153. See generally Max Horkheimer & Theodor W. Adorno, The Culture Industry, in DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT 120 (J. Cumming trans., 1987) (analyzing the rise of culture industries). But cf. Walter Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, in ILLUMINATIONS: ESSAYS AND REFLECTIONS 217 (Hannah Arendt ed., Harry Zohn trans., new ed. 1972) (predicting the liquidation of the "aura" of works once these are captured by modern mass media).
154. See generally CELIA LURY, CULTURAL RIGHTS: TECHNOLOGY, LEGALITY AND PERSONALITY 39-51, 67-92 (1993) (analyzing strategies for producing works to capture market segments).
155. See BERNARD EDELMAN, LA PROPRIÉTÉ LITTÉRAIRE ET ARTISTIQUE 90-102 (3d ed. 1999).
156. See ATTALI, supra note 83, at 128.
157. See, e.g., SAUNDERS, supra note 53, at 140-44 (detailing contractual approaches to marketing literary materials in the nineteenth century, such as magazine serialization and syndication).
158. See JOHNS, supra note 47, at 226-27; KAPLAN, supra note 43, at 9-12, 16-17; also FEATHER, supra note 36, at 95-96 (noting that, at the end of eighteenth century, piracy only meant textual copying).
159. 2 RENOUARD, supra note 39, at 37. See also BIRRELL, supra note 38, ch. 6 (comparing the development of British with European law concerning derivative works, quotation, etc., in the nineteenth century).
160. See Paul Goldstein, Adaptation Rights and Moral Rights in the United Kingdom, the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany, 14 INT'L REV. INDUS. PROP. & COPR. LAW [I.I.C.] 43 (1983); Lionel Bently, Copyright and Translations in the English Speaking World, 12 TRANSLATIO: FIT NEWSLETTER 491, 496-99 (1993); Martin Vogel, Die Entfaltung des Übersetzungsrecht im deutschen Urheberrecht des 19. Jahrhunderts, 1991 GRUR 16.
161. See Paul Goldstein, Adaptation Rights and Moral Rights in the United Kingdom, the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany, 14 INT'L REV. INDUS. PROP. & COPR. LAW [I.I.C.] 43 (1983); Lionel Bently, Copyright and Translations in the English Speaking World, 12 TRANSLATIO: FIT NEWSLETTER 491, 496-99 (1993); Martin Vogel, Die Entfaltung des Übersetzungsrecht im deutschen Urheberrecht des 19. Jahrhunderts, 1991 GRUR 16.
162. See Paul Goldstein, Adaptation Rights and Moral Rights in the United Kingdom, the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany, 14 INT'L REV. INDUS. PROP. & COPR. LAW [I.I.C.] 43 (1983); Lionel Bently, Copyright and Translations in the English Speaking World, 12 TRANSLATIO: FIT NEWSLETTER 491, 496-99 (1993); Martin Vogel, Die Entfaltung des Übersetzungsrecht im deutschen Urheberrecht des 19. Jahrhunderts, 1991 GRUR 16.
163. For analysis of the development of such doctrines in Anglo-American law, see KAPLAN, supra note 43, at 18-74; for a comparative analysis, see IVAN CHERPILLOD, L'OBJET DU DROIT D'AUTEUR, part 1 passim (1985).
164. For analysis of the development of such doctrines in Anglo-American law, see KAPLAN, supra note 43, at 18-74; for a comparative analysis, see IVAN CHERPILLOD, L'OBJET DU DROIT D'AUTEUR, part 1 passim (1985).
165. See Robert H. Rotstein, Beyond Metaphor: Copyright Infringement and the Fiction of the Work, 68 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 701 (1993); Paul Edward Geller, Hiroshige v. Van Gogh: Resolving the Dilemma of Copyright Scope in Remedying Infringement, 46 J. COPR. SOC'Y 39 (1998) [hereinafter Geller, Hiroshige v. Van Gogh].
166. See Robert H. Rotstein, Beyond Metaphor: Copyright Infringement and the Fiction of the Work, 68 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 701 (1993); Paul Edward Geller, Hiroshige v. Van Gogh: Resolving the Dilemma of Copyright Scope in Remedying Infringement, 46 J. COPR. SOC'Y 39 (1998) [hereinafter Geller, Hiroshige v. Van Gogh].
167. See generally PIERRE BOURDIEU, THE RULES OF ART: GENESIS AND STRUCTURE OF THE LITERARY FIELD 47-112 passim (Susan Emanuel trans., 1996) (tracing the social origins of this ideal in nineteenth-century France). But cf. SAUNDERS, supra note 53, 123-26, 164 (singling out Matthew Arnold as one of few who, in Anglo-American culture, voiced misgivings about massmarketing culture).
168. I:1 STRÖMHOLM, supra note 114, at 196. See also EDELMAN, supra note 118, at 36-53 (explaining conceptual and jurisprudential roots of French moral rights); Martin Vogel, Urheberpersönlichkeitsreicht und Verlagsrecht im letzten Drittel des 19. Jahrhunderts, 1994 GRUR 587 (tracing the origins of German moral rights from philosophical theory through contractual practice in the publishing field).
169. I:1 STRÖMHOLM, supra note 114, at 196. See also EDELMAN, supra note 118, at 36-53 (explaining conceptual and jurisprudential roots of French moral rights); Martin Vogel, Urheberpersönlichkeitsreicht und Verlagsrecht im letzten Drittel des 19. Jahrhunderts, 1994 GRUR 587 (tracing the origins of German moral rights from philosophical theory through contractual practice in the publishing field).
170. William Eden c. Whistler, Cour de Cassation [Cass.] (Supreme Court), March 14, 1900, Dalloz, 1900, I, 63.
171. See generally STROWEL, supra note 109, 481-537 (surveying French, Belgian, and German developments).
172. For details of this history, see JOHN HESKETT, INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, chs. 1-5 (1980); EDWARD LUCIE-SMITH, A HISTORY OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, pt. 1 (1983). For further social background, including interfaces with copyright law, see ADRIAN FORTY, OBJECTS OF DESIRE: DESIGN AND SOCIETY SINCE 1750, esp. 48-49, 59-60 (1986).
173. For details of this history, see JOHN HESKETT, INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, chs. 1-5 (1980); EDWARD LUCIE-SMITH, A HISTORY OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, pt. 1 (1983). For further social background, including interfaces with copyright law, see ADRIAN FORTY, OBJECTS OF DESIRE: DESIGN AND SOCIETY SINCE 1750, esp. 48-49, 59-60 (1986).
174. For details of this history, see JOHN HESKETT, INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, chs. 1-5 (1980); EDWARD LUCIE-SMITH, A HISTORY OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, pt. 1 (1983). For further social background, including interfaces with copyright law, see ADRIAN FORTY, OBJECTS OF DESIRE: DESIGN AND SOCIETY SINCE 1750, esp. 48-49, 59-60 (1986).
175. Compare SHERMAN & BENTLY, supra note 66, at 63-94 passim, 163-66 (tracing the development of the British approach), with CAROLINE CARREAU, MÉRITE ET DROIT D'AUTEUR 191-230 passim (1981) (development of the French approach).
176. See generally J.H. Reichman, Legal Hybrids Between the Patent and Copyright Paradigms, 94 COLUM. L. REV. 2432, 2448-64 (1994) [hereinafter Reichman, Legal Hybrids] (distinguishing markets for aesthetic works and functional products, as well as corresponding copyright and patent paradigms).
177. See Harold A. Innis, The Bias of Communication, in THE BIAS OF COMMUNICATION, supra note 82, at 33, 58-59.
178. See id.; also WILLIAM BRIGGS, THE LAW OF INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT 40-41 (1906) (recounting how the text of a book, within days of initial British publication, was cabled to U.S. and put on sale there).
179. See id.; also WILLIAM BRIGGS, THE LAW OF INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT 40-41 (1906) (recounting how the text of a book, within days of initial British publication, was cabled to U.S. and put on sale there).
180. See 1 LADAS, supra note 44, at 25-26. Cf. PLANT, supra note 30, at 432-41 (surveying piratical competition and the start of treaty process).
181. See e.g., SAM RICKETSON, THE BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF LITERARY AND ARTISTIC WORKS: 1886-1986, 38 (1987) (including a chart of mid-19th century arrangements).
182. BRIGGS, supra note 134, at 162.
183. For further history, see JEAN CAVALLI, LA GENÈSE DE LA CONVENTION DE BERNE POUR LA PROTECTION DES OEUVRES LITTÉRAIRES ET ARTISTIQUES DU 9 SEPTEMBRE 1886, pts. 2-3 (1986).
184. At first, authors who were nationals of other Berne countries obtained national treatment only for their unpublished works or for works first published in another Berne country; only later did such authors obtain national treatment for all their works, irrespective of the place of publication. See Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Sept. 9, 1886, as last revised at Paris, July 24, 1971, arts. 3-4, 828 U.N.T.S. 221 [hereinafter Berne Convention].
185. SAUNDERS, supra note 53, at 165.
186. See George Haven Putnam, Preface to the First Edition, in THE QUESTION OF COPYRIGHT, xviii-xix (George Haven Putnam ed., 2d ed. 1896).
187. For further details, see AUBERT J. CLARK, THE MOVEMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT IN NINETEENTH CENTURY AMERICA, chs. 3-4 (1960). Only rarely did U.S. publishers accord royalties to foreign authors as a matter of "courtesy copyright." See FEATHER, supra note 36, at 153-54.
188. See SAUNDERS, supra note 53, at 165.
189. See, e.g., BIRRELL, supra note 38, at 32 (stating in 1899: "Practically the value of the Convention turns upon its provisions as to translations."); Paul Edward Geller, New Dynamics in International Copyright, 16 COLUM.-VLA J. LAW & ARTS 461 (1992) (tracing out the Berne revision process in the context of media changes).
190. See, e.g., BIRRELL, supra note 38, at 32 (stating in 1899: "Practically the value of the Convention turns upon its provisions as to translations."); Paul Edward Geller, New Dynamics in International Copyright, 16 COLUM.-VLA J. LAW & ARTS 461 (1992) (tracing out the Berne revision process in the context of media changes).
191. See generally WILHELM NORDEMANN, ET AL., INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT AND NEIGHBORING RIGHTS LAW: COMMENTARY WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY 15-19, 20-23, 27-29 (R. Livingston trans., 1990) (analyzing overall relations of Berne and other treaty provisions to national laws).
192. Ciné Vog Films c. CODITEL, Tribunal de 1re instance (Trial Court), 2e eh., Brussels, June 19, 1975, 86 REV. INT'LE DU DROIT D'AUTEUR [RIDA] 124 (1975). See also the Ludis tonalis decision, Oberster Gerichtshof (Supreme Court, Austria), Jan. 31, 1995, 1995 GRUR INT. 729, note Wm. Dillenz (applying the minimum Berne right against the copying of sheet music for educational purposes that Austrian copyright law would have allowed).
193. Ciné Vog Films c. CODITEL, Tribunal de 1re instance (Trial Court), 2e eh., Brussels, June 19, 1975, 86 REV. INT'LE DU DROIT D'AUTEUR [RIDA] 124 (1975). See also the Ludis tonalis decision, Oberster Gerichtshof (Supreme Court, Austria), Jan. 31, 1995, 1995 GRUR INT. 729, note Wm. Dillenz (applying the minimum Berne right against the copying of sheet music for educational purposes that Austrian copyright law would have allowed).
194. Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, including Trade in Counterfeit Goods, April 15, 1994, arts. 9-14 [hereinafter TRIPs Agreement], in Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, LEGAL INSTRUMENTS-RESULTS OF THE URUGUAY ROUND vol. 31, 33 I.L.M. 81 (1994).
195. For further analysis, see Paul Edward Geller, Legal Transplants in International Copyright: Some Questions of Method, 13 UCLA PAC. BASIN L. J. 199 (1994) [hereinafter Geller, Transplants].
196. See supra text accompanying note 87.
197. See John Perry Barlow, The Economy of Ideas: A Framework for Rethinking Patents and Copyrights, WIRED, Mar. 1994, at 84, reprinted in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT 169 (P. Bernt Hugenholtz ed., 1996).
198. See supra text accompanying notes 121-25.
199. See generally EUGEN ULMER, URHEBER-UND VERLAGSRECHT 275-78 (3rd ed. 1980) (noting that, in such cases, defendant so transforms plaintiff's protected materials that these "fade away" [verblassen] in defendant's work); Geller, Hiroshige v. Van Gogh, supra note 125, at 53-59 (tracing a spectrum from piratical copying to innovatively recasting prior works).
200. For further analysis, see NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, THE UNPREDICTABLE CERTAINTY, esp. chs. 4-5 (1996).
201. See generally Paul Edward Geller, From Patchwork to Network: Strategies for International Intellectual Property in Flux, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 553 (1998) and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. 69 (1998) [hereinafter Geller, From Patchwork to Network] (drawing and illustrating this distinction).
202. See generally Paul Edward Geller, From Patchwork to Network: Strategies for International Intellectual Property in Flux, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 553 (1998) and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. 69 (1998) [hereinafter Geller, From Patchwork to Network] (drawing and illustrating this distinction).
203. See W. RUSSELL NEUMAN, THE FUTURE OF THE MASS AUDIENCE 48-74 passim (1991); NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, supra note 153, at 11-22.
204. See, e.g., Peggy M. Irish & Randall H. Trigg, Supporting Collaboration in Hypermedia: Issues and Experiences, in THE SOCIETY OF TEXT: HYPERTEXT, HYPERMEDIA, AND THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF INFORMATION 90 (Edward Barrett ed., 1989) (analyzing existing technologies); Carl Tollander, Collaborative Engines for Multiparticipant Cyberspaces, in CYBERSPACE: FIRST STEPS 303 (Michael Benedikt ed., 1992) (anticipating future systems).
205. See, e.g., Peggy M. Irish & Randall H. Trigg, Supporting Collaboration in Hypermedia: Issues and Experiences, in THE SOCIETY OF TEXT: HYPERTEXT, HYPERMEDIA, AND THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF INFORMATION 90 (Edward Barrett ed., 1989) (analyzing existing technologies); Carl Tollander, Collaborative Engines for Multiparticipant Cyberspaces, in CYBERSPACE: FIRST STEPS 303 (Michael Benedikt ed., 1992) (anticipating future systems).
206. Suit was brought when a pirate copied and resold the users' variations on the game, which the court held to be derivative works relative to the original game, so that the manufacturer could sue the pirate directly. Micro Star v. FormGen Inc., 154 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 1998).
207. NEUMAN, supra note 155, at 174.
208. It remains to be seen whether such nodes will be capable of anonymously inputting into the Internet or whether each user will be identifiable by biometric or software coding. See LAWRENCE LESSIG, CODE AND OTHER LAWS OF CYBERSPACE, eh. 4 (1999).
209. See generally Dan L. Burk, Virtual Exit in the Global Information Economy, 73 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 943, 948-61 (1998) (contrasting "physical" barriers tending "to keep the effect of piracy localized" in geographical space with "porous" borders in Cyberspace).
210. It is profitable piracy that makes suing most feasible. In cases where a judgment-proof pirate takes another's work for non-commercial purposes, an infringement action becomes less economically viable. See, e.g., NEAL BOWERS, WORDS FOR THE TAKING: THE HUNT FOR A PLAGIARIST (1997) (telling the frustrating tale of seeking remedy for the taking of poetry for petty, personal reasons).
211. See Egbert J. Dommering, Copyright Being Washed Away through the Electronic Sieve: Some Thoughts on the Impending Copyright Crisis, in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 1, 10.
212. See supra text accompanying notes 130-32.
213. See generally CARL SHAPIRO & HAL R. VARIAN, INFORMATION RULES: A STRATEGIC GUIDE TO THE NETWORK ECONOMY, chs. 3-4 (1998) (exploring various options).
214. See, e.g., Charles Clark, The Answer to the Machine is in the Machine, in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 139; Mark Stefik, Shifting the Possible: How Trusted Systems and Digital Property Rights Challenge Us to Rethink Digital Publishing, 12 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 137 (1997) (both explaining different models of such delivery systems).
215. See, e.g., Charles Clark, The Answer to the Machine is in the Machine, in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 139; Mark Stefik, Shifting the Possible: How Trusted Systems and Digital Property Rights Challenge Us to Rethink Digital Publishing, 12 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 137 (1997) (both explaining different models of such delivery systems).
216. Cf. Declan McCullagh, DVD Lawyers Make Secret Public, WIRED NEWS, Jan. 26, 2000, at (visited Jan. 27, 2000) (reporting on suit against the public posting of the present D.V.D. decryption code).
217. See supra text accompanying note 65.
218. See, e.g., Chris Oakes, Stamping Out Pirated Tunes, WIRED NEWS, Jan. 29, 2000, at (visited Jan. 31, 2000) (reporting on a service which tracks the Internet and negotiates the take-down of infringing materials with service providers).
219. Cf. Schuyler M. Moore, Internet Distribution of Films Presents Problems and Possibilities, AFMA INDEPENDENT, Nov./Dec. 1999, at 1, 6 (predicting that theatrical release will continue as the first phase of film exploitation even after Internet exploitation cannibalizes video and pay-TV windows).
220. See supra text accompanying notes 119-148.
221. See Joel Reidenberg, Governing Networks and Rule-Making in Cyberspace, in BORDERS IN CYBERSPACE: INFORMATION POLICY AND THE GLOBAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE 84, 96-100 (Brian Kahin & Charles Nesson eds., 1997) [hereinafter BORDERS IN CYBERSPACE].
222. See supra text accompanying notes 97-112.
223. See Ejan Mackaay, The Economics of Emergent Property Regimes on the Internet, in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 13.
224. For further analysis, see Geller, From Patchwork to Network, supra note 154, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. at 561-63 and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. at 76-78.
225. For further analysis, see Geller, From Patchwork to Network, supra note 154, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. at 561-63 and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. at 76-78.
226. For further analysis of this interaction, see LESSIG, supra note 159, ch. 7.
227. Once enacted, the pending Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act (UCITA), previously the U.C.C. Article 2B, would form one such underlying law. For different perspectives and further references, see (visited Feb. 5, 2000); (visited Feb. 5. 2000); (visited Feb. 5, 2000).
228. Cf. Niva Elkin-Koren, Copyrights in Cyberspace - Rights without Laws, 73 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 1155, 1195-97 (1998) (critiquing reliance on contractual processes as generating a "multiplicity of horizontal rights with no clear hierarchy between them").
229. See W. DAVID SLAWSON, BINDING PROMISES: THE LATE 20TH-CENTURY REFORMATION OF CONTRACT LAW 65-67, 90-103 (1996).
230. See generally Lear, Inc. v. Adkins, 395 U.S. 653, 673 (1969). In this case, the Supreme Court reversed a California contract ruling which threatened to restrict the public domain. Contractual terms can limit Internet access to public-domain works, just as they do now for hard copies. For example, contractual terms, eminently reasonable in tenor, controlled the copying of museum-quality transparencies of public-domain works in the exhibits of Hiroshige v. Van Gogh, supra note 125. It remains to be seen whether anti-trust or copyright analysis best responds to overreaching restrictions on Internet access to public-domain materials.
231. Compare 4 MELVILLE B. NIMMER & DAVID NIMMER, NIMMER ON COPYRIGHT § 13.05, at 13-150 (Rel. 48, 1999) (emphasizing the "malleability of fair use"), with 2 PAUL GOLDSTEIN, COPYRIGHT § 10.1.3, at 10:9 (2d ed. 2000) (seeking to unify analysis in terms of "transactions costs"). For comparisons of U.S. fair use with European approaches, see ALAI STUDY DAYS, CAMBRIDGE 1998: THE BOUNDARIES OF COPYRIGHT: ITS PROPER LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS (Libby Baulch et al. eds, 1999).
232. Compare 4 MELVILLE B. NIMMER & DAVID NIMMER, NIMMER ON COPYRIGHT § 13.05, at 13-150 (Rel. 48, 1999) (emphasizing the "malleability of fair use"), with 2 PAUL GOLDSTEIN, COPYRIGHT § 10.1.3, at 10:9 (2d ed. 2000) (seeking to unify analysis in terms of "transactions costs"). For comparisons of U.S. fair use with European approaches, see ALAI STUDY DAYS, CAMBRIDGE 1998: THE BOUNDARIES OF COPYRIGHT: ITS PROPER LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS (Libby Baulch et al. eds, 1999).
233. Compare Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994) (holding that parody may be excused as fair use even upon showing of economic harm), and the Alcolix decision, Bundesgerichtshof (Supreme Court, Germany), March 11, 1993, 1994 GRUR 206, translated in 25 I.I.C. 605, 609 (1994) (excusing parody as free utilization while referring to constitutionally mandated "freedom of art").
234. See Tom W. Bell, Fair Use vs. Fared Use: The Impact of Automated Rights Management on Copyright's Fair Use Doctrine, 76 N.C. L. REV. 557, 581-96 (1998). For analysis of European developments, see Thomas Heide, Access Control and Innovation under the EU Electronic Commerce Framework, in 2000 MOLENGRAFICA EUROPEES PRIVAATRECHT 65 (K. Boele-Woelki & F.W. Grosheide eds.).
235. See Tom W. Bell, Fair Use vs. Fared Use: The Impact of Automated Rights Management on Copyright's Fair Use Doctrine, 76 N.C. L. REV. 557, 581-96 (1998). For analysis of European developments, see Thomas Heide, Access Control and Innovation under the EU Electronic Commerce Framework, in 2000 MOLENGRAFICA EUROPEES PRIVAATRECHT 65 (K. Boele-Woelki & F.W. Grosheide eds.).
236. For distinct frameworks of analysis, see Raymond T. Nimmer, Breaking Barriers' The Relation Between Contract and Intellectual Properly Law, 13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 827 (1998); J.H. Reichman & Jonathan A. Franklin, Privately Legislated Intellectual Property Rights: Reconciling Freedom of Contract with Public Good Uses of Information, 147 U. PENN. L. REV. 875 (1999).
237. For distinct frameworks of analysis, see Raymond T. Nimmer, Breaking Barriers' The Relation Between Contract and Intellectual Properly Law, 13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 827 (1998); J.H. Reichman & Jonathan A. Franklin, Privately Legislated Intellectual Property Rights: Reconciling Freedom of Contract with Public Good Uses of Information, 147 U. PENN. L. REV. 875 (1999).
238. See supra text accompanying note 165. Copyright and contract remedies generally differ, most notably with regard to injunctive relief. On how the scope of copyright turns on such remedies, see infra text accompanying notes 238-49. Thus it may be asked whether contract terms and law allow for appropriate remedies, whether at the level of self-help or in court, relative to copyright remedies. For diverse analyses, see Kenneth W. Dam, Self-Help in the Digital Jungle, 28 J. LEGAL STUD. 393, 403-10 (1999); Julie E. Cohen, Copyright and the Jurisprudence of Self-Help, 13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 1089 (1998).
239. See supra text accompanying note 165. Copyright and contract remedies generally differ, most notably with regard to injunctive relief. On how the scope of copyright turns on such remedies, see infra text accompanying notes 238-49. Thus it may be asked whether contract terms and law allow for appropriate remedies, whether at the level of self-help or in court, relative to copyright remedies. For diverse analyses, see Kenneth W. Dam, Self-Help in the Digital Jungle, 28 J. LEGAL STUD. 393, 403-10 (1999); Julie E. Cohen, Copyright and the Jurisprudence of Self-Help, 13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 1089 (1998).
240. See supra text accompanying note 165. Copyright and contract remedies generally differ, most notably with regard to injunctive relief. On how the scope of copyright turns on such remedies, see infra text accompanying notes 238-49. Thus it may be asked whether contract terms and law allow for appropriate remedies, whether at the level of self-help or in court, relative to copyright remedies. For diverse analyses, see Kenneth W. Dam, Self-Help in the Digital Jungle, 28 J. LEGAL STUD. 393, 403-10 (1999); Julie E. Cohen, Copyright and the Jurisprudence of Self-Help, 13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 1089 (1998).
241. See, e.g., Michel Marriott, It's Not Big Brother, It's Customer Service, N.Y. TIMES, Jan. 27, 2000, at D1, at (visited Jan. 27, 2000) (asking when tracking users on Web violates privacy). For further analysis, see Pamela Samuelson, Privacy As Intellectual Property?, 52 STAN. L. REV. 1125 (2000).
242. See, e.g., Michel Marriott, It's Not Big Brother, It's Customer Service, N.Y. TIMES, Jan. 27, 2000, at D1, at (visited Jan. 27, 2000) (asking when tracking users on Web violates privacy). For further analysis, see Pamela Samuelson, Privacy As Intellectual Property?, 52 STAN. L. REV. 1125 (2000).
243. See David Johnson & David Post, The Rise of Law on the Global Network, in BORDERS IN CYBERSPACE, supra note 171, at 3.
244. For further information, see (visited Feb. 5, 2000).
245. See supra text accompanying note 178.
246. See generally Raymond T. Nimmer, Licensing on the Global Information Infrastructure: Disharmony in Cyberspace, 16 Nw. J. INT'L L. & BUS. 224, 235-47 (1995) (noting conflicts of laws, as well as varying standards for consumer and commercial contracts, in the electronic licensing of intellectual property). For European points of view, see F.W. Grosheide, Mass-Market Exploitation of Digital Information by the Use of Shrink-Wrap and Click-Wrap Licenses: A Dutch Perspective on Article 2B UCC, 1998 MOLENGRAFICA EUROPEES PRIVAATRECHT 263 (K. Boele-Woelki & F.W. Grosheide eds); François Dessemontet, Contracting and Licensing on the Net, in FESTKRIFT TILL GUNNAR KARNELL 111 (Lars Gorton et al. eds., 1999).
247. See generally Raymond T. Nimmer, Licensing on the Global Information Infrastructure: Disharmony in Cyberspace, 16 Nw. J. INT'L L. & BUS. 224, 235-47 (1995) (noting conflicts of laws, as well as varying standards for consumer and commercial contracts, in the electronic licensing of intellectual property). For European points of view, see F.W. Grosheide, Mass-Market Exploitation of Digital Information by the Use of Shrink-Wrap and Click-Wrap Licenses: A Dutch Perspective on Article 2B UCC, 1998 MOLENGRAFICA EUROPEES PRIVAATRECHT 263 (K. Boele-Woelki & F.W. Grosheide eds); François Dessemontet, Contracting and Licensing on the Net, in FESTKRIFT TILL GUNNAR KARNELL 111 (Lars Gorton et al. eds., 1999).
248. See generally Raymond T. Nimmer, Licensing on the Global Information Infrastructure: Disharmony in Cyberspace, 16 Nw. J. INT'L L. & BUS. 224, 235-47 (1995) (noting conflicts of laws, as well as varying standards for consumer and commercial contracts, in the electronic licensing of intellectual property). For European points of view, see F.W. Grosheide, Mass-Market Exploitation of Digital Information by the Use of Shrink-Wrap and Click-Wrap Licenses: A Dutch Perspective on Article 2B UCC, 1998 MOLENGRAFICA EUROPEES PRIVAATRECHT 263 (K. Boele-Woelki & F.W. Grosheide eds); François Dessemontet, Contracting and Licensing on the Net, in FESTKRIFT TILL GUNNAR KARNELL 111 (Lars Gorton et al. eds., 1999).
249. See Amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on certain legal aspects of electronic commerce in the Internal Market (Doc. 599PC0427, Sept. 6, 1999), arts. 9-11 [hereinafter Proposal for European Directive on electronic commerce], at (visited Feb. 5, 2000).
250. For further analysis, see Geller, From Patchwork to Network, supra note 154, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. at 573-74 and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. at 88-89.
251. For further analysis, see Geller, From Patchwork to Network, supra note 154, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. at 573-74 and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. at 88-89.
252. See supra text accompanying notes 63-71.
253. See supra text accompanying notes 89-109.
254. See supra text accompanying notes 144-48.
255. See supra text accompanying notes 174-75.
256. See supra text accompanying notes 154-60.
257. See HABERMAS, supra note 62, at 229-33; also JÜRGEN HABERMAS, BETWEEN FACTS AND NORMS: CONTRIBUTIONS TO A DISCOURSE THEORY OF LAW AND DEMOCRACY 334-59 (William Rehg trans., 1996) (critiquing theory that finds resulting hyperregulation to be inevitable).
258. See HABERMAS, supra note 62, at 229-33; also JÜRGEN HABERMAS, BETWEEN FACTS AND NORMS: CONTRIBUTIONS TO A DISCOURSE THEORY OF LAW AND DEMOCRACY 334-59 (William Rehg trans., 1996) (critiquing theory that finds resulting hyperregulation to be inevitable).
259. Pub. L. 105-304, 112 Stat. 2860. Cf. A. Michael Froomkin, 2B as Legal Software for Electronic Contracting - Operating System or Trojan Horse?, 13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 1023, 1024 (1998) (comparing drafts of U.C.C. Article 2B to test versions of complex software).
260. Pub. L. 105-304, 112 Stat. 2860. Cf. A. Michael Froomkin, 2B as Legal Software for Electronic Contracting - Operating System or Trojan Horse?, 13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 1023, 1024 (1998) (comparing drafts of U.C.C. Article 2B to test versions of complex software).
261. For examples, see David Nimmer, Puzzles of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 46 J. COPR. SOC'Y 401 (1999).
262. See e.g., Otto B. Licks, Brazil § 8[1][a][ii], in 1 INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT LAW AND PRACTICE at BRA-46 (Paul Edward Geller ed., 1999) [hereinafter INT'L COPR. LAW & PRACTICE] (glossing Brazilian statute which concisely provides for remedies against both circumventing copy-protection systems and tampering with rights-management information).
263. See e.g., 17 U.S.C. § 512(j)(1)(B)(ii) (Supp. IV 1998) (empowering U.S. courts to block access to off-shore servers, but without stating whether U.S. access must be shown to obtain an injunction).
264. Note that courts, confronted by infringement, cannot finesse conflicts of laws as can private parties who, in contracting, may stipulate to having a given law apply to their transactions. See supra text accompanying notes 191.
265. For a framework of analysis in a global context, see Paul Edward Geller, International Copyright: An Introduction § 3[1][b], in 1 INT'L COPR. LAW & PRACTICE, supra note 200, at INT-46 to INT-59.
266. For overviews, see 1 AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE, RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONFLICT OF LAWS, ch. 7, topic 1, Introductory Note, 412-13 (1971); Paul Edward Geller, Conflicts of Laws in Cyberspace: Rethinking International Copyright, 20 COLUM.-VLA J. LAW & ARTS 571, 574-78 (1996), in more concise versions in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 29-32; 44 J. COPR. SOC'Y 103, 104-07 (1996).
267. For overviews, see 1 AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE, RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONFLICT OF LAWS, ch. 7, topic 1, Introductory Note, 412-13 (1971); Paul Edward Geller, Conflicts of Laws in Cyberspace: Rethinking International Copyright, 20 COLUM.-VLA J. LAW & ARTS 571, 574-78 (1996), in more concise versions in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 29-32; 44 J. COPR. SOC'Y 103, 104-07 (1996).
268. For overviews, see 1 AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE, RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONFLICT OF LAWS, ch. 7, topic 1, Introductory Note, 412-13 (1971); Paul Edward Geller, Conflicts of Laws in Cyberspace: Rethinking International Copyright, 20 COLUM.-VLA J. LAW & ARTS 571, 574-78 (1996), in more concise versions in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 29-32; 44 J. COPR. SOC'Y 103, 104-07 (1996).
269. For overviews, see 1 AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE, RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONFLICT OF LAWS, ch. 7, topic 1, Introductory Note, 412-13 (1971); Paul Edward Geller, Conflicts of Laws in Cyberspace: Rethinking International Copyright, 20 COLUM.-VLA J. LAW & ARTS 571, 574-78 (1996), in more concise versions in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 29-32; 44 J. COPR. SOC'Y 103, 104-07 (1996).
270. See Peter P. Swire, Of Elephants, Mice, and Privacy: International Choice of Law and the Internet, 32 INT'L LAW. 991, 1019-25 (1998).
271. For this goal, see RICHARD A. EPSTEIN, SIMPLE RULES FOR A COMPLEX WORLD, ch. 1 (1995).
272. Cf. Jack L. Goldsmith, Against Cyberanarchy, 65 U. CHI. L. REV. 1199, 1230-31 (1998) (contemplating a variety of legal and self-help regimes in cyberspace, but admitting that hese "techniques will not resolve all conflict of laws in cyberspace" without harmonization).
273. See supra text accompanying notes 144-48.
274. See generally WILLY HOFFMANN, DIE BERNER UEBEREINKUNFT ZUM SCHUTZE VON WERKEN DER LITERATUR UND KUNST 12-14 (1935) (distinguishing different degrees to which minimum rights are open-ended).
275. See Berne Convention, supra note 139, art. 9; also TRIPs Agreement, supra note 147, art. 13 (extending these criteria to all copyright limitations and exceptions).
276. See SHERMAN & BENTLY, supra note 66, at 214-15.
277. See David G. Post & David R. Johnson, "Chaos Prevailing on Every Continent": Towards a New Theory of Decentralized Decision-Making in Complex Systems, 73 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 1055, 1078-93 (1998); also Dan L. Burk, supra note 160, at 972-95 (favoring mix of local experimentation and global harmonization).
278. Compare Mario Fabiani, Italy § 1[1], in 2 INT'L COPR. LAW & PRACTICE, supra note 200, at ITA-6 ("The Copyright Act, from its initial enactment in 1941, was a pioneer in granting others besides authors, most notably performers and media producers, what the Act called 'connected rights' [diritti connessi] but are now internationally called 'neighboring rights'."), and Adolf Dietz, Germany § 1[1], in 2 INT'L COPR. LAW & PRACTICE, supra note 200, at GER-18 to GER-19 ("The German legislators, complementing the usual remedies and sanctions for direct copyright infringement, have indeed developed new mechanisms for remunerating rights-holders for subtle, but widespread uses of works and other media productions.").
279. Compare Mario Fabiani, Italy § 1[1], in 2 INT'L COPR. LAW & PRACTICE, supra note 200, at ITA-6 ("The Copyright Act, from its initial enactment in 1941, was a pioneer in granting others besides authors, most notably performers and media producers, what the Act called 'connected rights' [diritti connessi] but are now internationally called 'neighboring rights'."), and Adolf Dietz, Germany § 1[1], in 2 INT'L COPR. LAW & PRACTICE, supra note 200, at GER-18 to GER-19 ("The German legislators, complementing the usual remedies and sanctions for direct copyright infringement, have indeed developed new mechanisms for remunerating rights-holders for subtle, but widespread uses of works and other media productions.").
280. See supra text accompanying notes 209-10.
281. See Proposal for European Directive on electronic commerce, supra note 190, Recitals 6, 12-14, and 16-17.
282. See supra text accompanying notes 186-91.
283. See generally Kamiel Koelman & Bernt Hugenholtz, Online Service Provider Liability for Copyright Infringement, WIPO Doc. OSP/LIA/1 Rev. 1 (Nov. 22, 1999), in Workshop on Service Provider Liability, Dec. 9-10, 1999, at (visited Feb. 5, 2000) [hereinafter WIPO Workshop on Liability] (comparing European and U.S. approaches at doctrinal and legislative levels). See, e.g., Nils Bortloff & Janet Henderson, Notice and Take-Down Agreements in Practice in Europe - Views from the Internet Service Provider and Telecommunications Industries and the Recording Industry, OSP/LIA/3 (Dec. 1, 1999), in WIPO Workshop on Liability, supra note 217 (explaining how voluntary European arrangements are working in practice).
284. See generally Kamiel Koelman & Bernt Hugenholtz, Online Service Provider Liability for Copyright Infringement, WIPO Doc. OSP/LIA/1 Rev. 1 (Nov. 22, 1999), in Workshop on Service Provider Liability, Dec. 9-10, 1999, at (visited Feb. 5, 2000) [hereinafter WIPO Workshop on Liability] (comparing European and U.S. approaches at doctrinal and legislative levels). See, e.g., Nils Bortloff & Janet Henderson, Notice and Take-Down Agreements in Practice in Europe - Views from the Internet Service Provider and Telecommunications Industries and the Recording Industry, OSP/LIA/3 (Dec. 1, 1999), in WIPO Workshop on Liability, supra note 217 (explaining how voluntary European arrangements are working in practice).
285. See generally Batur Oktay & Greg Wrenn, A Look Back at the Notice-Takedown Provisions of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act One Year After Enactment, OSP/LIA/2 (Dec. 1, 1999) in WIPO Workshop on Liability, supra note 217 (explaining U.S. legislative scheme and how it is working in practice).
286. See, e.g., Bortloff & Henderson, in WIPO Workshop on Liability, supra note 217, at 32; Oktay & Wrenn, in WIPO Workshop on Liability, supra note 217, at 17 (both indicating that users tend to be reluctant to challenge the take-down of even defensible postings, especially when their legal resources do not match those of claimants).
287. See, e.g., Bortloff & Henderson, in WIPO Workshop on Liability, supra note 217, at 32; Oktay & Wrenn, in WIPO Workshop on Liability, supra note 217, at 17 (both indicating that users tend to be reluctant to challenge the take-down of even defensible postings, especially when their legal resources do not match those of claimants).
288. Cf. SHAPIRO & VARIAN, supra note 164, at 237-38 (contrasting formal standard-setting arrangements with practices).
289. For an overview, see WIPO, Final Report of the WIPO Internet Domain Name Process, April 30, 1999, WIPO Publication No. 92-805-0779-6, at (visited Feb. 5, 2000).
290. See supra text accompanying note 180.
291. For further analysis, see Paul Edward Geller, From Patchwork to Network, supra note 154, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. at 570-72 and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. at 86-88.
292. For further analysis, see Paul Edward Geller, From Patchwork to Network, supra note 154, 31 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. at 570-72 and 9 DUKE J. INT'L & COMP. L. at 86-88.
293. See supra text accompanying notes 123-32.
294. See supra text accompanying notes 154-59.
295. See generally Geller, Transplants, supra note 148, at 219-29 (distinguishing between rules best developed and applied with judicial discretion and rules best harmonized in treaties and legislation). See, e.g., Berne Convention, supra note 139, art. 6bis(3) (declaring that the "means of redress for safegarding" minimum moral rights are up to the discretion of the protecting country).
296. See generally Geller, Transplants, supra note 148, at 219-29 (distinguishing between rules best developed and applied with judicial discretion and rules best harmonized in treaties and legislation). See, e.g., Berne Convention, supra note 139, art. 6bis(3) (declaring that the "means of redress for safegarding" minimum moral rights are up to the discretion of the protecting country).
297. See supra text accompanying note 119.
298. WIPO Copyright Treaty, art. 8; 36 I.L.M. 65 (1997); WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, arts. 10, 14, 36 I.L.M. 76 (1997), both reprinted in 44 J. COPR. SOC'Y 118 (1996).
299. See generally ANDRÉ LUCAS, DROIT D'AUTEUR ET NUMÉRIQUE 191 (1998) (noting that the "border" between public and private gets "scrambled" by new media and analyzing copyright limitations in that light).
300. See Mario Fabiani, The Geneva Diplomatic Conference on Copyright and the Rights of Performers and Phonogram Producers, [1997] 3 ENT. L. REV. 98, 102.
301. See Dommering, supra note 162, at 1-7.
302. Jaap H. Spoor, The Copyright Approach to Copying on the Internet: (Over)Stretching the Reproduction Right, in THE FUTURE OF COPYRIGHT, supra note 150, at 67, 76.
303. See Paul Edward Geller, Reprography and Other Processes of Mass Use, 38 J. Copr. Soc'y 21, 22 (1990), and in 153 RIDA 3, 7-9 (1992).
304. See Paul Edward Geller, Reprography and Other Processes of Mass Use, 38 J. Copr. Soc'y 21, 22 (1990), and in 153 RIDA 3, 7-9 (1992).
305. Compare American Geophysical Union v. Texaco, Inc., 60 F.3d 913 (2d Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1005 (1995) (holding that giving access to copies throughout the same company, notably to hundreds of research scientists, is infringing, especially in the light of market impact), with Tribunal de grande instance [T.G.I.] Paris, réf. (Superior Court, Injunctions Judge, France), June 10, 1997, J.C.P. 1997, II, 22974, note Olivier (refusing to enjoin unauthorized access through an intranet at the French National Center for Scientific Research).
306. See supra text accompanying notes 123-25.
307. See supra text accompanying notes 154-59.
308. Huston c. Turner Entertainment, CA (Court of Appeals) Versailles, ch. réunies, Dec. 19, 1994, 164 RIDA 389 (1995), on remand from Cass. 1e civ., May 28, 1991, 149 RIDA 197 (1991), translated in 23 I.I.C. 702 (1992).
309. Huston c. Turner Entertainment, CA (Court of Appeals) Versailles, ch. réunies, Dec. 19, 1994, 164 RIDA 389 (1995), on remand from Cass. 1e civ., May 28, 1991, 149 RIDA 197 (1991), translated in 23 I.I.C. 702 (1992).
310. Huston c. Turner Entertainment, CA (Court of Appeals) Versailles, ch. réunies, Dec. 19, 1994, 164 RIDA 389 (1995), on remand from Cass. 1e civ., May 28, 1991, 149 RIDA 197 (1991), translated in 23 I.I.C. 702 (1992).
311. See supra text accompanying notes 129-32.
312. See supra text accompanying notes 228-34.
313. See generally Geller, Transplants, supra note 148, at 211-13, 221-23.
314. See Geller, Hiroshige v. Van Gogh, supra note 125, at 59-70; also Mark A. Lemley & Eugene Volokh, Freedom of Speech and Injunctions in Intellectual Property Cases, 48 DUKE L.J. 147 (1998) (arguing that overriding rights of free expression may preclude preliminary injunctions in copyright cases).
315. See Geller, Hiroshige v. Van Gogh, supra note 125, at 59-70; also Mark A. Lemley & Eugene Volokh, Freedom of Speech and Injunctions in Intellectual Property Cases, 48 DUKE L.J. 147 (1998) (arguing that overriding rights of free expression may preclude preliminary injunctions in copyright cases).
316. See WIPO Copyright Treaty, supra note 228, art. 12; WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, supra note 228, art. 19. See generally Adolf Dietz, General Report: Authenticity of Authorship and Work, in ALAI STUDY DAYS, AMSTERDAM 1996: COPYRIGHT IN CYBERSPACE 165, 176 (Marcel Dellebeke ed., 1997) (contemplating producers' as well as authors' rights to assure the authenticity of digitized works, subject to some "balancing of interests").
317. See WIPO Copyright Treaty, supra note 228, art. 12; WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, supra note 228, art. 19. See generally Adolf Dietz, General Report: Authenticity of Authorship and Work, in ALAI STUDY DAYS, AMSTERDAM 1996: COPYRIGHT IN CYBERSPACE 165, 176 (Marcel Dellebeke ed., 1997) (contemplating producers' as well as authors' rights to assure the authenticity of digitized works, subject to some "balancing of interests").
318. Cf. David Sanjek, "Don't Have to DJ No More": Sampling and the "Autonomous" Creator, 10 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 607, 622-23 (1992) (indicating how more scrupulous artists who sample and reconfigure the works of others systematically acknowledge the authors of these works).
319. See Paul Edward Geller, The Universal Electronic Archive: Issues in International Copyright, 25 I.I.C. 54, 63-66 (1994).
320. See Reichman, Legal Hybrids, supra note 132, at 2500-04.
321. See, e.g., State St. Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Fin. Group, 149 F.3d 1369, 1372-76 (Fed. Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1093 (1999) (holding that computer programs are patentable subject matter).
322. See Council Directive 96/9/EC of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, 1996 O.J. (L 077) 20, 23-27.
323. Id., art. 7.1.
324. See, e.g., EMAP Business Comms. Ltd v. Planit Media AB, Hovrätt Skåne & Blekinge (Court of Appeal, Sweden), Aug. 2,1999, [2000] 2 EURO. COPR. & DESIGN RPTS. 93 (dismissing appeal of trial court's refusal to enjoin use of plaintiffs data in defendant's Internet database because the categorizations of the data sets at issue, to the extent similar, were not original and the sets themselves differed in many items).
325. See supra text accompanying notes 202-04, 215-23, and 231-49.
326. For the bases of this analysis, see Paul Edward Geller, Must Copyright Be For Ever Caught Between Marketplace and Authorship Norms?, in OF AUTHORS AND ORIGINS: ESSAYS IN COPYRIGHT LAW, 159 (Brad Sherman & Alain Strowel eds., 1994); Paul Edward Geller, Toward an Overriding Norm in Copyright: Sign Wealth, 159 RIDA 3 (1994).
327. For the bases of this analysis, see Paul Edward Geller, Must Copyright Be For Ever Caught Between Marketplace and Authorship Norms?, in OF AUTHORS AND ORIGINS: ESSAYS IN COPYRIGHT LAW, 159 (Brad Sherman & Alain Strowel eds., 1994); Paul Edward Geller, Toward an Overriding Norm in Copyright: Sign Wealth, 159 RIDA 3 (1994).
328. 8 Anne, ch. 19 (1710).
329. U.S. CONST., art. I, § 8, cl. 8.
330. Le Moniteur Universel, Jan. 15, 1791, set out in alternative versions and translated in STERLING, supra note 11, at 1002-05. See also HESSE, supra note 58, at 91 (citing case predating the Laws of 1791 and 1793 in which the French court invoked the "sacred right of property" as a basis for enforcing copyright); STROWEL, supra note 109, at 90-91 (noting, critically, the original context for this slogan).
331. See, e.g., JEAN LE ROND D'ALEMBERT, DISCOURS PRÉLIMINAIRE DE L'ENCYCLOPÉDIE 49-51 (Éditions Gonthier 1965) (1763) (considering the fine arts, literature, and music as kinds of knowledge [connaissances]).
332. JOHN LOCKE, SECOND TREATISE OF GOVERNMENT 66 (§ 123) (C.B. Macpherson ed., Hackett Publ. Co. 1980) (1690).
333. For the elaboration of this insight historically in the field of copyright, see Gillian K. Hadfield, The Economics of Copyright: An Historical Perspective, in 38 ASCAP COPYRIGHT LAW SYMPOSIUM 1 (1992).
334. See generally Ejan Mackaay, Economic Incentives in Markets for Information and Innovation, 13 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'Y 867 (1990) (arguing that free-riders need to be controlled to provide incentives for creation and dissemination); Michael Lehmann, The Theory of Property Rights and the Protection of Intellectual and Industrial Property, 16 I.I.C. 525 (1985) (arguing that free-riding must be restricted "in order to promote competition" in a stable marketplace).
335. See generally Ejan Mackaay, Economic Incentives in Markets for Information and Innovation, 13 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'Y 867 (1990) (arguing that free-riders need to be controlled to provide incentives for creation and dissemination); Michael Lehmann, The Theory of Property Rights and the Protection of Intellectual and Industrial Property, 16 I.I.C. 525 (1985) (arguing that free-riding must be restricted "in order to promote competition" in a stable marketplace).
336. See supra text accompanying notes 252-53.
337. See generally WILLIAM KINGSTON, INNOVATION: THE CREATIVE IMPULSE IN HUMAN PROGRESS, ch. 3 (1977) (questioning whether economic incentives are always indispensable for creation).
338. For background, see Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Emily Dickinson, in EMILY DICKINSON, SELECTED POEMS AND LETTERS 5-24 (Robert N. Linscott ed., 1959); VINCENT VAN GOGH, THE LETTERS OF VINCENT VAN GOGH (Ronald de Leeuw ed., Arnold Pomerans trans., 1996).
339. For background, see Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Emily Dickinson, in EMILY DICKINSON, SELECTED POEMS AND LETTERS 5-24 (Robert N. Linscott ed., 1959); VINCENT VAN GOGH, THE LETTERS OF VINCENT VAN GOGH (Ronald de Leeuw ed., Arnold Pomerans trans., 1996).
340. See, e.g., William M. Landes & Richard A. Posner, An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law, 18 J. LEGAL STUD. 325, 327 (1989) ("To simplify the analysis, we ignore any distinction between the costs incurred by authors and by publishers, and therefore use the term 'author' (or 'creator') to mean both author and publisher.").
341. See, e.g., JACQUELINE SEIGNETTE, CHALLENGES TO THE CREATOR DOCTRINE, ch. 4 (1994) (analyzing the impacts of copyright provisions on the risks that media enterprises run in bringing works into the public marketplace); Paul Goldstein, Copyright: The Donald C. Brace Memorial Lecture, 38 J. COPR. SOC'Y 109, 113 (1991) (pointing out that "a robust copyright" will give "publishers, if not quite a lottery, then at least a portfolio that will promote investment and sustain a wider variety of authorship").
342. See, e.g., JACQUELINE SEIGNETTE, CHALLENGES TO THE CREATOR DOCTRINE, ch. 4 (1994) (analyzing the impacts of copyright provisions on the risks that media enterprises run in bringing works into the public marketplace); Paul Goldstein, Copyright: The Donald C. Brace Memorial Lecture, 38 J. COPR. SOC'Y 109, 113 (1991) (pointing out that "a robust copyright" will give "publishers, if not quite a lottery, then at least a portfolio that will promote investment and sustain a wider variety of authorship").
343. See Immanuel Kant, Von der Unrechtmässigkeit des Büchernachdrucks, [1785] 5 BERLINISCHE MONATSCHRIFT 403, reprinted in 1987 ARCHIV FÜR URHEBER- FILM- FUNK- UND THEATERRECHT 137, 142-43. For a gloss on Kant, see STERLING, supra note 11, at 1026-27.
344. See Immanuel Kant, Von der Unrechtmässigkeit des Büchernachdrucks, [1785] 5 BERLINISCHE MONATSCHRIFT 403, reprinted in 1987 ARCHIV FÜR URHEBER- FILM- FUNK- UND THEATERRECHT 137, 142-43. For a gloss on Kant, see STERLING, supra note 11, at 1026-27.
345. For such examples, see PETER BÜRGER, THEORY OF THE AVANT-GARDE 51-53 (Michael Shaw trans., 1984).
346. 1 RENOUARD, supra note 39, at 434-35, 457-60 (1838). E.C. case law has consecrated this aim of compensation as the "specific object" or "essential function" of copyright. See, e.g., Case 62/79, CODITEL v. Ciné Vog Films S.A., E.C. Court of Justice, March 18, 1980, 1980 E.C.R. 881, [1981] 2 C.M.L.R. 362, 399-400 (deciding not to restrict copyright, in order not to undercut compensation).
347. See generally ADOLF DIETZ, DAS DROIT MORAL DES URHEBERS IM NEUEN FRANZÖSISCHEN UND DEUTSCHEN URHEBERRECHT, pt. 3 (1968) (distinguishing roles of moral rights and discussing seminal cases and commentary on point).
348. See supra text accompanying note 254.
349. See supra text accompanying notes 151-52.
350. See ROSE, supra note 54, at 25 (1993). For background, see GEOFFREY BULLOUGH, NARRATIVE AND DRAMATIC SOURCES OF SHAKESPEARE (8 vols., 1957-75).
351. See ROSE, supra note 54, at 25 (1993). For background, see GEOFFREY BULLOUGH, NARRATIVE AND DRAMATIC SOURCES OF SHAKESPEARE (8 vols., 1957-75).
352. See generally KLAUS BERGER, JAPONISME IN WESTERN PAINTING FROM WHISTLER TO MATISSE (1992) (detailing the historical roles of Japanese art forms in modern European art).
353. See supra text accompanying notes 123-29.
354. See Roger-Ferdinand, L'affaire "Carmen Jones," 8 RIDA 3, 21 (1955).
355. Compare T.G.I. Paris, 3e eh., Oct. 15, 1992, 155 RIDA 225 (1993) (enjoining the casting of women in Waiting for Godot on the application of Beckett, the playwright), with Rb. Haarlem, Pres. (District Court, Injunctions Judge, Netherlands), April 29, 1988, [1988] 4 INFORMATIERECHT/AMI 83, note Cohen Jehoram (refusing to enjoin a new version of Waiting for Godot, even though Beckett challenged it as a travesty). For further critical analysis, see Fintan O'Toole, Game Without End, N.Y. REV. BOOKS, Jan. 20, 2000, at 43.
356. Compare T.G.I. Paris, 3e eh., Oct. 15, 1992, 155 RIDA 225 (1993) (enjoining the casting of women in Waiting for Godot on the application of Beckett, the playwright), with Rb. Haarlem, Pres. (District Court, Injunctions Judge, Netherlands), April 29, 1988, [1988] 4 INFORMATIERECHT/AMI 83, note Cohen Jehoram (refusing to enjoin a new version of Waiting for Godot, even though Beckett challenged it as a travesty). For further critical analysis, see Fintan O'Toole, Game Without End, N.Y. REV. BOOKS, Jan. 20, 2000, at 43.
357. Compare T.G.I. Paris, 3e eh., Oct. 15, 1992, 155 RIDA 225 (1993) (enjoining the casting of women in Waiting for Godot on the application of Beckett, the playwright), with Rb. Haarlem, Pres. (District Court, Injunctions Judge, Netherlands), April 29, 1988, [1988] 4 INFORMATIERECHT/AMI 83, note Cohen Jehoram (refusing to enjoin a new version of Waiting for Godot, even though Beckett challenged it as a travesty). For further critical analysis, see Fintan O'Toole, Game Without End, N.Y. REV. BOOKS, Jan. 20, 2000, at 43.
358. See Demsetz, supra note 59, at 20; Horacio M. Spector, An Outline of a Theory Justifying Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights, [1989] 8 EUR. INTELL. PROP. REV. 270.
359. See Demsetz, supra note 59, at 20; Horacio M. Spector, An Outline of a Theory Justifying Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights, [1989] 8 EUR. INTELL. PROP. REV. 270.
360. Compare Hank Brown & David Miller, Copyright Term Extension: Sapping American Creativity, 44 J. COPR. SOC'Y 94, 98-99 (1996) (protesting lack of evidence), with Arthur Miller, Copyright Term Extension: Boon for American Creators and the American Economy, 45 J. COPR. SOC'Y 319, 323-24 (1998) (responding with anecdotal evidence).
361. Compare Hank Brown & David Miller, Copyright Term Extension: Sapping American Creativity, 44 J. COPR. SOC'Y 94, 98-99 (1996) (protesting lack of evidence), with Arthur Miller, Copyright Term Extension: Boon for American Creators and the American Economy, 45 J. COPR. SOC'Y 319, 323-24 (1998) (responding with anecdotal evidence).
362. See PAUL GOLDSTEIN, COPYRIGHT'S HIGHWAY: THE LAW AND LORE OF COPYRIGHT FROM GUTENBERG TO THE CELESTIAL JUKEBOX, ch. 5 (1994); EDELMAN, supra note 118, at 26-38, pt. 2 passim.
363. Compare Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithography Co., 188 U.S. 239, 250 (1903) (Holmes, J.) ("It would be a dangerous undertaking for persons trained only in the law to constitute themselves judges of the worth of" a work at issue), and France, Intellectual Property Code, Art. 112-1 (making protection independent "of the kind, form of expression, merit or intended use" of a work).
364. For another, comparable framework of analysis, see Egbert J. Dommering, An Introduction to Information Law: Works of Fact at the Crossroads of Freedom and Protection, in PROTECTING WORKS OF FACTS: COPYRIGHT, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND INFORMATION LAW 1 (Egbert J. Dommering & P. Bernt Hugenholtz eds., 1991).
365. See supra text accompanying notes 33-67.
366. See supra text accompanying notes 85-112.
367. See supra text accompanying notes 115-48.
368. See ROGER SHATTUCK, THE BANQUET YEARS, ch. 1 (rev. ed. 1968).
369. See BOURDIEU, supra note 126, at 113-40 passim.
370. See supra text accompanying notes 59-61 and 257-58.
371. See supra text accompanying notes 87-88 and 264.
372. See supra text accompanying notes 149-249.
373. See supra text accompanying notes 195-96.
374. See supra text accompanying notes 154-60, 196, and 205.
375. See supra text accompanying notes 282-84.